linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mfd: viperboard: allocate I/O buffer separately

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 22 Sep 2014 18:20:50 +0200
From:	Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To:	Octavian Purdila <octavian.purdila@...el.com>
Cc:	Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: viperboard: allocate I/O buffer separately

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 07:19:37PM +0300, Octavian Purdila wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 05:46:52PM +0300, Octavian Purdila wrote:

> > Don't mix fixes and clean ups like this, but rather submit them as
> > separate patches.
> >
> Fair enough. Is it OK to send all of the cleanups in a single separate
> patch?

In this case, I'd say so. But do the clean-ups on top of the minimal fix
to facilitate back-porting if someone ever decides that that is needed.

Johan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/